Jauronimo Posted March 29, 2016 Posted March 29, 2016 (edited) I freely admit that. Me and 95% of Bills Nation thought the defense would lay waste to opponents. I expected to see 10-12 bloodbaths last year. My pre-2015 expectations were clear. I thought we'd dominate the majority of games but--because of Rex Ryan--be good for a stinker or two or three. I never in a 1,000,000 years expected a mediocre defense. I also didn't expect the team to be ravaged by injuries like it was in contrast to the spoils of 2014. What does that have to do with anything? FURTHER: if they finish 31st in 3 and out percentage again, and if those three and outs come in bunches against teams with good offenses again, then yeah, I'd say it's highly improbable that we have a top two defense. That's not even the 100th most absurd thing said on this board today. Why? In 2014 we were 26th in 3 and outs on a percentage basis and 1 worse on an aggregate basis relative to 2015, yet our defense was among the top units in the league. Perhaps if our defense got the ball back more often our offense might find rhythm and have even less 3 and outs? Its a two way street. Be careful where you assign causality. Edited March 29, 2016 by Jauronimo
FireChan Posted March 29, 2016 Posted March 29, 2016 Why? In 2014 we were 26th in 3 and outs on a percentage basis and 1 worse on an aggregate basis yet our defense was among the top units in the league. Perhaps if our defense got the ball back more often our offense might find rhythm and have even less 3 and outs? Its a two way street. Be careful where you assign causality. Where do you think we are?
Dopey Posted March 30, 2016 Posted March 30, 2016 Bolded represents the reality most in this argument won't accept. As for three and outs, the global percentage does tell part of the story. And alone, it was good for 31st in the NFL. But the impact of those three and outs is best measured when you look at how they came: often in bunches. This has been my point now for about two months. It doesn't excuse the defense for not being able to get off the field. And nobody is suggesting they weren't better at getting off the field in 2014. But that doesn't invalidate the impact that three and outs DID have on the defense, and thus on the OUTCOMES of games. This has been my contention and the numbers bear it out. While I will agree the 3 and outs in bunches hurts, my eyes watching this d and the #s saw a discombobulated(sp) defense. Last year's d was in trouble. Bunches of 3 and out or not. I guess I just hated the ENORMOUS waste of a good to pretty good defense. I'm hoping for the best and I think the offense will play a role in helping the d with sustained drives that end up with points on the board.
John from Riverside Posted March 30, 2016 Posted March 30, 2016 I freely admit that. Me and 95% of Bills Nation thought the defense would lay waste to opponents. I expected to see 10-12 bloodbaths last year. My pre-2015 expectations were clear. I thought we'd dominate the majority of games but--because of Rex Ryan--be good for a stinker or two or three. I never in a 1,000,000 years expected a mediocre defense. I also didn't expect the team to be ravaged by injuries like it was in contrast to the spoils of 2014. What does that have to do with anything? FURTHER: if they finish 31st in 3 and out percentage again, and if those three and outs come in bunches against teams with good offenses again, then yeah, I'd say it's highly improbable that we have a top two defense. That's not even the 100th most absurd thing said on this board today. I didnt expect a medicore defense either.....and most that are complaining also did not While I will agree the 3 and outs in bunches hurts, my eyes watching this d and the #s saw a discombobulated(sp) defense. Last year's d was in trouble. Bunches of 3 and out or not. I guess I just hated the ENORMOUS waste of a good to pretty good defense. I'm hoping for the best and I think the offense will play a role in helping the d with sustained drives that end up with points on the board. What I got upset at was watching guys like Graham....or McKelvin......or name your pick defensive player get upset after a play because they knew a mistake was made that that caused it to happen. This defense has a lot of pride in being very good.....I hope they can recapture that.
The Big Cat Posted March 30, 2016 Posted March 30, 2016 While I will agree the 3 and outs in bunches hurts, my eyes watching this d and the #s saw a discombobulated(sp) defense. Last year's d was in trouble. Bunches of 3 and out or not. I guess I just hated the ENORMOUS waste of a good to pretty good defense. I'm hoping for the best and I think the offense will play a role in helping the d with sustained drives that end up with points on the board. And it's my hope that last year's defense was a short term setback in favor of long term stability. I've said it, and I'll continue to say it: something happened in week two wherein the wheels came off BIG TIME. Granted, the Colts didn't exactly pan out as world beaters, but the defense that showed up week one was never to be seen from again. I don't know why.
BADOLBILZ Posted March 31, 2016 Posted March 31, 2016 FURTHER: if they finish 31st in 3 and out percentage again, and if those three and outs come in bunches against teams with good offenses again, then yeah, I'd say it's highly improbable that we have a top two defense. That's not even the 100th most absurd thing said on this board today. First of all........there are worse things than punting....and 3 and outs mean punting........"any drive that ends in a kick" and so forth.. But beyond the axioms.......there is nothing to suggest that punting a lot hurt the Bills defense in 2015. Obviously the Marrone/Schwartz/Orton Bills 3-and-outed/punted a lot.....couldn't run the ball for sh*t.....couldn't convert third downs.......you name it they couldn't do it well on offense......and yet they finished near the top defensively. But forget that team....because I am sure that is an aberration to you. How about this.........Denver had the top ranked defense and won the SB this past season while punting more often than Buffalo...for a lesser net. Yeah, but all those 3 and outs reflect a lack of offensive production, right? No, they were 12th in total offense and 6th in yards per play. So.......are you implying time of possession was an issue? We all know the Bills were the top running team in the NFL so unsurprisingly they were 8th in the NFL in offensive time of possession so TOP wasn't exacting a toll on their defense. You would really be hard pressed to cherry pick a more peripherally unsupported stat in your defense of Rex Ryan..........but kudos to you for picking one that "sounds" good.
The Big Cat Posted March 31, 2016 Posted March 31, 2016 First of all........there are worse things than punting....and 3 and outs mean punting........"any drive that ends in a kick" and so forth.. But beyond the axioms.......there is nothing to suggest that punting a lot hurt the Bills defense in 2015. Obviously the Marrone/Schwartz/Orton Bills 3-and-outed/punted a lot.....couldn't run the ball for sh*t.....couldn't convert third downs.......you name it they couldn't do it well on offense......and yet they finished near the top defensively. But forget that team....because I am sure that is an aberration to you. How about this.........Denver had the top ranked defense and won the SB this past season while punting more often than Buffalo...for a lesser net. Yeah, but all those 3 and outs reflect a lack of offensive production, right? No, they were 12th in total offense and 6th in yards per play. So.......are you implying time of possession was an issue? We all know the Bills were the top running team in the NFL so unsurprisingly they were 8th in the NFL in offensive time of possession so TOP wasn't exacting a toll on their defense. You would really be hard pressed to cherry pick a more peripherally unsupported stat in your defense of Rex Ryan..........but kudos to you for picking one that "sounds" good. You're smarter than EVERYONE! But not smart enough to miss the irony of accusing me of cherry picking stats. Precisely what was your point again?
4merper4mer Posted March 31, 2016 Author Posted March 31, 2016 You're smarter than EVERYONE! But not smart enough to miss the irony of accusing me of cherry picking stats. Precisely what was your point again? His clearly demonstrated point is that you are grasping with desparate futility at straws to justify an irrational conclusion that you have made that makes no more sense than calling a roll of a die that comes up anything other than 3.5 an error.
The Big Cat Posted March 31, 2016 Posted March 31, 2016 His clearly demonstrated point is that you are grasping with desparate futility at straws to justify an irrational conclusion that you have made that makes no more sense than calling a roll of a die that comes up anything other than 3.5 an error. Ha. I'll give you one more try because I'm convinced you still don't want to understand. What was my point?
John from Riverside Posted March 31, 2016 Posted March 31, 2016 Well we agree that we hope the Bills win. Thanks for calling me stupid because I don't see the way you connected the dots as valid. Have you considered that the difficulty grasping inefficiencies may be yours? No....in this case its you
John from Riverside Posted March 31, 2016 Posted March 31, 2016 TBH I wasn't all that impressed with the defense in week 1. Luck seemed confused for most of the day, but he had time to throw the ball as we weren't pressuring him all that much.(which was the theme for the defense all year. No pressure/sacks.)Luck just looked like **** as he did for most of the year when healthy. Week 2 was a cluster !@#$ defensively. I really didnt think we were getting our act defensively at all till the latter part of the season.
The Big Cat Posted March 31, 2016 Posted March 31, 2016 (edited) I really didnt think we were getting our act defensively at all till the latter part of the season. By my count, the defense had 9 good performances in 2015 and finished 5-4 over that stretch. I'll show the data analysis (again) which I'm following for this after I put together the offense. Thus far, the defensive data accurately tells the 2015 story, IMO. I already shared these on the board, they're a series of heat maps. But tonight I added an "average" performance and--while it has its limitations and is pretty basic--it's a pretty honest portrayal of how 2015 went. I look forward to posting it again when I've done the offensive one. In the meantime, the 9 good defensive performances according to my method: IND NYG TEN JAX NYJ* NE2 PHI DAL* NYJ2* *Exceptionally good, according to my range. On this flip side, sub-par defensive performances: NE* MIA CIN MIA2* KC* HOU WAS* * Exceptionally bad, according to my range. More to come Edited March 31, 2016 by The Big Cat
4merper4mer Posted March 31, 2016 Author Posted March 31, 2016 By my count, the defense had 9 good performances in 2015 and finished 5-4 over that stretch. I'll show the data analysis (again) which I'm following for this after I put together the offense. Thus far, the defensive data accurately tells the 2015 story, IMO. I already shared these on the board, they're a series of heat maps. But tonight I added an "average" performance and--while it has its limitations and is pretty basic--it's a pretty honest portrayal of how 2015 went. I look forward to posting it again when I've done the offensive one. In the meantime, the 9 good defensive performances according to my method: IND NYG TEN JAX NYJ* NE2 PHI DAL* NYJ2* *Exceptionally good, according to my range. On this flip side, sub-par defensive performances: NE* MIA CIN MIA2* KC* HOU WAS* * Exceptionally bad, according to my range. More to come More to come what? You are far off if your analysis above. I'll pick on just a few. I assume you're going off statistics which is fine to an extent but it seems you are molding them to fit the narrative that a defense's performance has little impact on the teams W/L record. Bad performances: MIA1. Really? Didn't they get all of their output after the game was decided? Didn't we shut them out completely in the first half? Isn't that a good defensive performance? It does fit your story of winning games with a bad defense because you have re-defined what bad defense means. MIA2 - I don't really remember this game as well for some reason and it wasn't as much of a blowout but we did build a pretty good lead. Good performances: Giants - The Giants scored early and then slowed down. With the game on the line we badly botched an important play because of scheme confusion. This is a good defensive performance? Jax - I'm not blaming the defense for this loss but it was a neutral defensive performance at best. EJ put them in bad spots where they needed to step up and they didn't. They played well in 2H but blew it at the end with refs help. After the bad call they allowed the game winning play. Dal - Really? Statistically fine I suppose but Kellen Moore? Was there any way to not have a good defensive performance in that one?
The Big Cat Posted March 31, 2016 Posted March 31, 2016 (edited) More to come what? You are far off if your analysis above. I'll pick on just a few. Please pick a few more. ....you are molding them to fit the narrative that a defense's performance has little impact on the teams W/L record. Nope. That's never been by narrative/point/assertion. Yet you insist that you're following, still. Bad performances: MIA1. Really? Didn't they get all of their output after the game was decided? Didn't we shut them out completely in the first half? Isn't that a good defensive performance? It does fit your story of winning games with a bad defense because you have re-defined what bad defense means. This is definitely a game that points out the weakness in the model. This will be fleshed out more when I share the offensive maps. MIA2 - I don't really remember this game as well for some reason and it wasn't as much of a blowout but we did build a pretty good lead. Then you're not remembering the second game well. Hughes' strip sack completely changed the momentum of that game. Up until then, and including that drive, Miami was moving the ball at will. Good performances: Giants - The Giants scored early and then slowed down. With the game on the line we badly botched an important play because of scheme confusion. This is a good defensive performance? Yes, they scored early. But you cannot, by any measure, objectively say they "slowed down." Unless you honestly think that they thought 16 points in the first 20 minutes would win them the game and they were content to run out the clock for the entire second half and 10 minutes of the second quarter. The defense gave up ground early in that game, but they had it locked down after that. The loss in the Giants game belongs squarely to the offense. Jax - I'm not blaming the defense for this loss but it was a neutral defensive performance at best. EJ put them in bad spots where they needed to step up and they didn't. They played well in 2H but blew it at the end with refs help. After the bad call they allowed the game winning play. This isn't even remotely true. The defense had a very good game against JAX and ALLOWED the offense to claw back in then--oh by the way--scored the go-ahead touch down. And if not for the phantom PI on Robey, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. When you make arguments like this and like the one below about Dallas, it's pretty clear you're just disagreeing for argument's sake. Dal - Really? Statistically fine I suppose but Kellen Moore? Was there any way to not have a good defensive performance in that one? Doesn't matter. They still turned in a good performance. You can't just dismiss it out of hand because the opposing quarterback (who, btw, put up 435 the following week. Say what you will about that performance, but Kellen Moore's day in week 17 was better than any Bills quarterback since Bledsoe put up 467 in an overtime game in 2002.) And if we're going to eliminate good defensive performances because of a weak offensive opponent (which we shouldn't) then let's go through the 2014 schedule and eliminate both Jets game, the Vikings game, the Browns game and while we're at it let's just eliminate one Tannehill performance every year from the record. Edited March 31, 2016 by The Big Cat
The Big Cat Posted March 31, 2016 Posted March 31, 2016 For the most part I can't disagree. Although I wouldn't say they were "very good" in the Jacksonville game. They gave up a long TD drive early and then EJ **** himself and they couldn't hold the Jacksonville offense to field goals on short fields. The 2nd half they were much better but still gave up long drives and had a big goal line stop on Jaxs opening drive. Yes that was an awful PI call on Robey. It doesn't excuse the next play for which they scored on a 30 yard TD pass. No, but Corey Graham coming up lame sorta excuses it. The Jacksonville game was just plain weird. But it was, by and large, a good performance from the defense:
Gugny Posted March 31, 2016 Posted March 31, 2016 No, but Corey Graham coming up lame sorta excuses it. The Jacksonville game was just plain weird. But it was, by and large, a good performance from the defense: I have to respectfully disagree with this. There is no scenario in which any team give up over 30 points to the 2015 Jaguars after a "good" defensive performance. Yes, EJ put them in a tough spot ... but the D still let them get 6 instead of 3. If a team scores 30+ points and loses to the Jaguars, then that team's defense sucked.
The Big Cat Posted March 31, 2016 Posted March 31, 2016 (edited) I have to respectfully disagree with this. There is no scenario in which any team give up over 30 points to the 2015 Jaguars after a "good" defensive performance. Yes, EJ put them in a tough spot ... but the D still let them get 6 instead of 3. If a team scores 30+ points and loses to the Jaguars, then that team's defense sucked. Well, the defense didn't give up 30 points. They gave up 21, and 7 of those came on a short field (36 yards). Plus they scored 7 points of their own: net 14. Far cry from 30. Edited March 31, 2016 by The Big Cat
John from Riverside Posted March 31, 2016 Posted March 31, 2016 The jag game was incredibally frustratng EJ Manuels shows his worst and best We cant find a way to win The refs make an insanely bad call on Robey
The Big Cat Posted March 31, 2016 Posted March 31, 2016 The argument isn't whether the defense was perfect that day, but whether they were generally good. And giving up 23 YARDS over 8 non-scoring drives (not counting the kneel downs) is a pretty good day... The only other non-scoring drive had a goal line stand. They were better than they were bad that day.
3rdand12 Posted March 31, 2016 Posted March 31, 2016 I'll also add that I don't think it was the 1st Patriots game as much as it was the Giants game where the season started to take a turn for the worse. They got beat at home by a bad Giants team....The offense sucked, in part due to an unbelievable amount of penalties along with Watkins and McCoy sidelined. For the Defense, i do believe it was the Pats game. The Mojo Balloon was popped .
Recommended Posts